The Role of Resistance Economics in Fighting Emerging Threats
ALLAH MORAD SEIF
The Role of Resistance Economiy in Fighting Emerging Threats
(Backstopping on the phenomenon of international institutional dictatorship)
Allah Morad Saif
Associate Professor of Economics at Imam Hossein University (AS)
Introduction
In the age of globalization and the diminution of the national borders, and in the face of a great deal of economic de-mining, there are triple threats that justify a resilient economy for the Islamic Republic of Iran. These dangers are due to domestic damage, global crises, and the hostility of the dominant powers to the Islamic Revolution. The first and third cases are not the subject of this article, so the second issue will be discussed further.
Today, there are many global crises that directly or indirectly affect the fate of all nations, including ours. These crises are mostly emerging and, therefore, their impact is also greater, as countries are often not prepared to prepare for these crises. For this reason, today, the creation of conditions for “resilience” against various crises has become an important issue for countries. Although the resilience is not just about the economy and is a desirable feature for all systems of economic, political, cultural and social, but economic resilience is of particular importance, and this is why we will pay more attention here.
Dangers and Resilience
The Briguglio,s Economic Resilience (2006) has meant “being able to handle”, that is, the ability of a country to stand and resist external impulses. Duval defines it as”the ability to maintain a product level in close proximity to post-momentum capacity.” Aiginger calls it “the power of an economy to reduce the possibility of deepening the crisis or at least to cure the effects of a crisis.”
Briguglio states that the term economic resilience can be applied in two ways: first, the ability of the economy to recover rapidly from external economic collapse and the economy’s ability to stand up to the effects of these impacts. In general, economic resilience can be static or dynamic. Static economic stabilization refers to the capacity or capacity of a system to absorb or to counteract risks or losses. . In its more general definition, which includes considerations of dynamism and stability, economic resilience is referred to as a system for the recovery of a sustainable impetus. Also, there must be a difference between the two types of economic resilience:
۱) Intrinsic Economic Resilience – Ability in normal circumstances, ie the ability to replace other inputs for inputs that are experiencing external difficulties or the ability of markets to reallocate resources in response to price signals. This type of economic imbalance is inherent in an economy and policy is not made.
(۲) adaptive economic resilience – the ability to respond to crisis situations due to the inertia of the initiative and the extra-ordinary effort, ie the ability to replace the inputs in commercial operations, or to strengthen the markets by completing the information of the supply-and-demand economic agents to find each other . This type of economic turmoil is not in itself, but entirely “made politics.”
Another look at this approach is that the risk of the destruction of the economy from external impacts is affected by two factors. The first factor is the degree of vulnerability inherent in the country’s economy, and the second factor is the ability of the economy to deal with external impacts or economic resilience. The difference will determine the country’s risk. The result of this discussion is that, in order to create conditions for economic efficiency, it is necessary for the country to be able, on the one hand, to reduce its inherent vulnerabilities to one’s own, and, on the other hand, to use economic policies and appropriate flexibility. Make it against crises and foreign pressures. With these two general strategies, the same (albeit incomplete) conditions of what is meant by the concept of a resistance economy in the literature of JI Iran are achievable.
Emerging risks
In the context of the emerging crises of the World Economic Forum, the results of which are published annually, analyze 50 risks in five areas of economic, social, geopolitical, technological and environmental considerations, based on the view of 1000 experts from industry, government and university sectors. puts. These 50 risks are as follows:
۱) Economic risks
• Chronic financial imbalances and liabilities
• Job market imbalances and structural unemployment
• Extreme volatility of energy prices and agricultural products
• Sudden decline in the growth of emerging economies (China, India, Brazil, Russia …)
• The collapse of financial institutions and monetary regimes with global effects
• The chronic failure to invest in infrastructure networks
• Periodic crises of bank and financial liquidity
• Developing poor and rich gaps
• Unpredictable Negative Consequences of Rules on Industrial Structure, Capital Flows and Competition
• Reduced prices or uncontrolled inflation
۲) Environmental hazards
• Antibiotic-resistant bacteria
• Climate change and failure to adapt to it
• Constant contamination of water, air and soil threatening the ecosystem
• Land use mismanagement and environmental degradation, deforestation and desertification
• Municipal mismanagement and the expansion of urbanization and migration of villagers
• High weather stability due to increased construction density
• Increasing greenhouse gas emissions
• Biodiversity threats and species extinction or ecosystem collapse
• The destruction of geophysics caused by tsunami, earthquakes, landslides and volcanoes
• The vulnerability of solar geomagnetic storms and its impact on telecommunications and navigation systems
۳) Geopolitical hazards
• fragile states of economic and geopolitical importance
• Dissemination of Nuclear, Chemical, Biological, and Radio Nuclear Weapons of Mass Destruction
• Global organized crime networks
• The rise of political differences and the threat of armed conflicts
• The failure of international institutions in global affairs
• Space militarization and the threat to commercial, civil and military space assets and related land-based systems
• Corruption and abuse of power for self-sustaining and inclusive interests
• terrorism
• Unilateral nationalization of resources and the prohibition of key goods exports
• Smuggling
۴) Social hazards
• Political reactions to globalization
• The food shortage crisis
• drug dealing
• Mismanagement of population aging
• Increased rates of chronic diseases
• The rise of religious prejudices
• Immigration
• Unstable population growth
• Vulnerability from pandemic diseases
• water crisis
۵) Technological risks
• Failure in sensitive systems and sensitive information networks
• cyber attacks
• Failure in the international intellectual property regime
• Widespread digital misunderstandings
• Criminal exploitation of private data and information theft
• Increased dependency of industries on rare mineral resources
• Duplication of space waste creates a hazard for satellites
• Consequences of climate change reduction projects
• Unpredictable Nanotechnology Effects on Nanomateriality
• Unpredictable consequences of genetic and biological advances
The emergence of a variety of emerging risks, 50 of which are reported in the World Economic Forum report, has added to the complexity of the conditions for the preparation of the necessary preparedness against them. What is important is that a particular resonance in that area should be created against any of the hazards of the relevant area. In this case, apart from economic imbalances, environmental, social, geopolitical, and technological resilience should also be taken into account. While addressing each of these risks as an emerging phenomenon can be important here, we will look at a case of emerging threats that are not included in the global economic order list and are considered to be less relevant while for our country. Recent years have been very dangerous. We refer to this phenomenon as an “institutional dictatorship in the international fluid order”.
International fluid order and institutional dictatorship
Although all countries are part of the “international community,” today, there is a meaning in the existence of something called the “international system” due to the lack of a single, stable international order. The concept is not that chaos is ruling. Of course, chaos can rule in certain circumstances, but it is not necessarily the case. In the present age, which is defined by competition for power, there is a prevailing condition on international relations in which international organizations exist but lack the power to define and implement the international order. Under these conditions, any nation and government that has more power can play a role in shaping the international order, which is not defined as “static”, but in a “dynamic” and “fluid” way. Global forces, including markets and governments and institutions and organizations, are all involved in shaping this dynamic and fluid order. International organizations are all effective, but none, even the United Nations, alone determine the inter-national order. Due to the pace of change, “time” is the most decisive element in the international system, and in such a situation, attempts to coordinate with the international system will lead to the loss of time for the nations. Therefore, what is most desirable is an attempt to strengthen the components of national power and become powerful in influencing and contributing to the “international fluid order”. In this context, no state or nation is a permanent ally. Friends may become enemies, and alliances lack long-term, even medium-term sustainability, due to the fluidity of the international order. What is now seen in the behavior of the government of Tramp reveals the function of a universal power in the “international fluid order” with the characteristics mentioned. Understanding this fluid order for each nation and recognizing the role of the nation’s national power in influencing It is also very important.
The starting point for this “international fluid order” would be the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the collapse of the bipolar system. The Islamic Revolution was born in the fetal period of this “international fluid order” and experienced the first stage of its rule in this period. The rejection of UN resolution 598 by the Islamic Republic of Iran at the time of its issuance should also be seen as a sign of the new conditions of international order.
Understanding the international fluid order is important because, along with that, an institutional dictatorship can be defined. This institutional dictatorship is, in fact, a seemingly legitimate tool of governments that lack the power in a new international system to establish a unified and lasting order. Through this dictatorship, it is an institution that tries to develop on the other in the framework of this international order and govern their will. At first, a few large countries are pursuing a convention for specific purposes. In the next step, they will create some incentives for joining others, and in the third stage, penalties will be imposed on countries outside it. In this way, nations are forced to accept these conventions unconditionally. It is generally accepted that, in addition to a small number of countries, all the conventions are accepted or are in the process of being accepted, thus making independent nations internationally or, more precisely, ” International order “. In fact, this is nothing more than an “institutional dictatorship” in the international system that deprives liberty of choice from nations. It is only through understanding the conditions and relations governing power in the “international fluid order” that a nation can properly recognize the coordinates of its state of affairs and pursue long-term choices based on its long-term interests. In this way, it will be able to recognize the conditions of the “institutional dictatorship” promoted by some powers in the form of a “fictitious order” and refuse to surrender unconditionally.
The starting point for this “international fluid order” would be the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the collapse of the bipolar system. The Islamic Revolution was born in the fetal period of this “international fluid order” and experienced the first stage of its rule in this period. The rejection of UN resolution 598 by the Islamic Republic of Iran at the time of its issuance should also be seen as a sign of the new conditions of international order.
Understanding the international fluid order is important because, along with that, an institutional dictatorship can be defined. This institutional dictatorship is, in fact, a seemingly legitimate tool of governments that lack the power in a new international system to establish a unified and lasting order. Through this dictatorship, it is an institution that tries to develop on the other in the framework of this international order and govern their will. At first, a few large countries are pursuing a convention for specific purposes. In the next step, they will create some incentives for joining others, and in the third stage, penalties will be imposed on countries outside it. In this way, nations are forced to accept these conventions unconditionally. It is generally accepted that, in addition to a small number of countries, all the conventions are accepted or are in the process of being accepted, thus making independent nations internationally or, more precisely, ” International order “. In fact, this is nothing more than an “institutional dictatorship” in the international system that deprives liberty of choice from nations. It is only through understanding the conditions and relations governing power in the “international fluid order” that a nation can properly recognize the coordinates of its state of affairs and pursue long-term choices based on its long-term interests. In this way, it will be able to recognize the conditions of the “institutional dictatorship” promoted by some powers in the form of a “fictitious order” and refuse to surrender unconditionally.
The clearest reason for the lack of a single international order in the present era can be the acceptance of Obama’s “deal” agreement and the withdrawal of Tramp from it, before implementing the agreement and, at the same time, observing the international institutions and the United Nations, against This is a covenant. Such an experience has shown that the “international fluid order” has the capacity to accommodate both an agreement and an exit from the agreement. The European position, which, in addition to showing its diplomatic dissatisfaction with the withdrawal of America, is in effect complicit in accepting America’s demands for the resumption of sanctions, is another sign of the “international fluid order”. In this situation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, which, with the presumption of a stable order, has negotiated and fulfilled its obligations, the only achievement it will have to admire is the heads of government, and in practice has to deal with issues and problems The sanctions continue to clash.
Considering the international fluid order can provide a clear analytical framework for deciding whether or not to accede to international conventions, such as the Convention on the Financing of Terrorism (CFT). The clearest criterion in this respect is the consideration of long-term national interests, bearing in mind that these conventions will provide us with opportunities and threats in the absence of a stable order in the international system. It is clear that in the international space, one can not look for an opportunity free from threat, because in practice there is no such thing. An international treaty, along with the opportunities that it creates, will also pose a threat. Even so, it’s not so important that the opportunities of a treaty are greater than its threats. It is important, however, that the availability of opportunities for a nation is as affordable as possible, and which of the opportunities and threats available have a higher liquidity potential and the extent to which each one is affected. Therefore, the accession of so many countries to a treaty or convention should not be the basis for joining us, or in the sense of the reason for our refuge.
Considering the international fluid order can provide a clear analytical framework for deciding whether or not to accede to international conventions, such as the Convention on the Financing of Terrorism (CFT). The clearest criterion in this respect is the consideration of long-term national interests, bearing in mind that these conventions will provide us with opportunities and threats in the absence of a stable order in the international system. It is clear that in the international space, one can not look for an opportunity free from threat, because in practice there is no such thing. An international treaty, along with the opportunities that it creates, will also pose a threat. Even so, it’s not so important that the opportunities of a treaty are greater than its threats. It is important, however, that the availability of opportunities for a nation is as affordable as possible, and which of the opportunities and threats available have a higher liquidity potential and the extent to which each one is affected. Therefore, the accession of so many countries to a treaty or convention should not be the basis for joining us, or in the sense of the reason for our refuge.
The role of a resilient economy in post-BARJAM situations
As previously stated, in the new circumstances of the international system, the Islamic Republic of Iran, by striving to adapt to the international flourishing order defined by the ruling powers and for its structural benefits, is the key element of the “time” of Will give up Although interacting with the world, it is necessary to be present in the international community and to become a member of the conventions; however, it is expected to solve the economic problems by having a kind of look out for solving the problems that have occurred in the practical experience of the Islamic Republic of Iran in four decades. The past has shown inefficiency and inferiority. Conversely, wherever internal capacity is relied on, it has opened up, while solving faster and less costly domestic issues, has opened up new capacities to us in the international arena. The typical example of this look inside can be seen in the defense industries that brought us regional authority or nuclear technology, which led to the acceptance of the right to enrichment from the international community for the Islamic Republic of Iran.
From this angle, resistance is the most effective strategy against international institutional dictatorship. The main task of resilient economy is to strengthen the domestic foundations of the economy by relying on indigenous capacities and reliance on the people. Resistance economy can strengthen the role of the Islamic Republic in shaping the international fluid order by strengthening the national power components in the economy. While looking outside and linking the internal issues to the variables that we do not control, it will add itself to the volume and extent of domestic damage and, given the hostility of the dominant countries in the international system to the Islamic Republic of Iran, also provide us with an outlet for us. Will not provide. While looking inside will strengthen the foundations and national power, the country will be immunized from the dangers.
In short, in the present day, there is no permanent united state and nation. Friends may become enemies, and alliances lack long-term, even medium-term sustainability, due to the fluidity of the international order. What is now seen in the behavior of the Tramp government reveals the function of a global power in the “international fluid order” with the characteristics described. Understanding this fluid order for each nation and recognizing the role of the nation’s national power in influencing It is also very important, so what is most desirable is an attempt to strengthen the components of national power and to be powerful in influencing and contributing to the “international fluid order”, which is only possible with the strategy of resistance economics.
As previously stated, in the new circumstances of the international system, the Islamic Republic of Iran, by striving to adapt to the international flourishing order defined by the ruling powers and for its structural benefits, is the key element of the “time” of Will give up Although interacting with the world, it is necessary to be present in the international community and to become a member of the conventions; however, it is expected to solve the economic problems by having a kind of look out for solving the problems that have occurred in the practical experience of the Islamic Republic of Iran in four decades. The past has shown inefficiency and inferiority. Conversely, wherever internal capacity is relied on, it has opened up, while solving faster and less costly domestic issues, has opened up new capacities to us in the international arena. The typical example of this look inside can be seen in the defense industries that brought us regional authority or nuclear technology, which led to the acceptance of the right to enrichment from the international community for the Islamic Republic of Iran.
From this angle, resistance is the most effective strategy against international institutional dictatorship. The main task of resilient economy is to strengthen the domestic foundations of the economy by relying on indigenous capacities and reliance on the people. Resistance economy can strengthen the role of the Islamic Republic in shaping the international fluid order by strengthening the national power components in the economy. While looking outside and linking the internal issues to the variables that we do not control, it will add itself to the volume and extent of domestic damage and, given the hostility of the dominant countries in the international system to the Islamic Republic of Iran, also provide us with an outlet for us. Will not provide. While looking inside will strengthen the foundations and national power, the country will be immunized from the dangers.
In short, in the present day, there is no permanent united state and nation. Friends may become enemies, and alliances lack long-term, even medium-term sustainability, due to the fluidity of the international order. What is now seen in the behavior of the Tramp government reveals the function of a global power in the “international fluid order” with the characteristics described. Understanding this fluid order for each nation and recognizing the role of the nation’s national power in influencing It is also very important, so what is most desirable is an attempt to strengthen the components of national power and to be powerful in influencing and contributing to the “international fluid order”, which is only possible with the strategy of resistance economics.
What should be done in a post-BARJAM situations?
Iran’s economy is now exposed to the most violent economic war of history and the will of the enemy is to intensify it in the second half of this year. What the government of Mr. Rouhani has done so far has been an attempt to create an atmosphere of international understanding and negotiation with the great powers that, as a result of accomplishment, the unilateral withdrawal of the United States has largely become obsolete and practically ineffective. The European achievement, some of which is hoped, is in fact a reality and so far does not show a clear vision. What can be done in these circumstances and what options are available? Here are some of the options we’ll review and analyze briefly.
The first option for the Islamic Republic of Iran to fully adhere to the current situation (minus America), the signing of all European preconditions (such as the FATF and other financial agreements requested by Europe), and the hope that Europe will continue to fulfill their commitments. is . This passive option, although it seems to have the lowest political cost to us, but its economic cost will be significant. In fact, due to the impossibility of imposing heavy fines on private companies dealing with Iran, this option is not, in fact, a major way of solving the problems of the Iranian economy, and the more likely outcome is the deterioration of Iranian economic power, Loss of the national currency, the continuation of the conditions of the recession and the move towards oil-for-food conditions. Additionally, accepting Europeans’ wills in the FATF will have their own political costs, and they will pursue their political goals in limiting the Islamic Republic of Iran, through engaging in inhibition of financial transactions and financial espionage. Therefore, this simultaneous option will impose a heavy political and economic burden on the Islamic Republic of Iran, and will, in practice, continue to put pressure on the people and intensify public discontent, will lead us to missiles BARJAM , and so on.
The second option is the complete withdrawal of Iran from the pursuit of an effort to return to pre-consensus on nuclear technology and enrichment. This option, of course, will have a direct and indirect cost to us, and it can again bring our international political situation to the pre-consensus situation, and, despite the superiority of the United States in international fora, Another issue would be to impose sanctions on the United Nations Security Council. While this option will not achieve a certain economic outcome in the current situation, and despite the active activation of negative expectations inside, it can aggravate the domestic economy. Therefore, this option will impose both economic and political costs on us, as in the concurrent one.
The third option is to deal actively with new post-BARJAM situations. In this option, from the point of view of international politics, the continuation of the seemingly incident in order to minimize the legitimacy of the United States and maximize the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran and simultaneously, the effective use of post-war economic conditions, in order to activate domestic capacities and implement the general policies of the economy Resistance is recommended. In an active deal with Europe, the Islamic Republic of Iran can continue to comply with its commitments to provide practical guarantees from Europe to comply with the obligations of the other party and refrain from signing any other double obligation, including the FATF and other European requests. . The main strategy in this option is to maximize the capacity of indigenous peoples, along with adjusting the current domestic economy, to increase economic resilience to rebuild the national economy against the enemy’s economic warfare. Under this option, the Islamic Republic of Iran must move from a passive state to Europe and, within the framework of its commitments, develop its nuclear technology capabilities, put strategic plans and strategies on the agenda into serious action, and wasting Most of the national opportunities, which are still waiting for the opening of the action, have been delayed.
It is important to note that today’s Islamic Republic of Iran is in an important historic screw, and if it passes through this stage, it will be immune to excessive retaliation for a long time. The manifestation of national will in this historical test (such as the holy war) can be surprising, which, of course, depends on empathy, support and trust, and the participation of all people and economic factors. From this point of view, the creation of any disappointment and disappointment, under any pretext, is not accepted. The factional demands should be abandoned and the only compassionate concern must be the passage of the revolutionary ship and the system, under the leadership of the economic vortex created by the enemies. At the same time, despite the creation of profitable tensions in some markets, there are promising signs of empathy and the emergence of people, and this is the only pillar of steadfastness that governments can and should rely on in implementing resilient economy policies. . The change of view of statesmen from abroad is the most important change that is expected to be based on past experience in the behavior of statesmen. In the end, attention is drawn to the statements of the Supreme Leader in the gathering of Basijis at the Azadi Stadium on October 12, 1997, which stated: “Those who promote are betraying the path to refuge in the enemy.”
Iran’s economy is now exposed to the most violent economic war of history and the will of the enemy is to intensify it in the second half of this year. What the government of Mr. Rouhani has done so far has been an attempt to create an atmosphere of international understanding and negotiation with the great powers that, as a result of accomplishment, the unilateral withdrawal of the United States has largely become obsolete and practically ineffective. The European achievement, some of which is hoped, is in fact a reality and so far does not show a clear vision. What can be done in these circumstances and what options are available? Here are some of the options we’ll review and analyze briefly.
The first option for the Islamic Republic of Iran to fully adhere to the current situation (minus America), the signing of all European preconditions (such as the FATF and other financial agreements requested by Europe), and the hope that Europe will continue to fulfill their commitments. is . This passive option, although it seems to have the lowest political cost to us, but its economic cost will be significant. In fact, due to the impossibility of imposing heavy fines on private companies dealing with Iran, this option is not, in fact, a major way of solving the problems of the Iranian economy, and the more likely outcome is the deterioration of Iranian economic power, Loss of the national currency, the continuation of the conditions of the recession and the move towards oil-for-food conditions. Additionally, accepting Europeans’ wills in the FATF will have their own political costs, and they will pursue their political goals in limiting the Islamic Republic of Iran, through engaging in inhibition of financial transactions and financial espionage. Therefore, this simultaneous option will impose a heavy political and economic burden on the Islamic Republic of Iran, and will, in practice, continue to put pressure on the people and intensify public discontent, will lead us to missiles BARJAM , and so on.
The second option is the complete withdrawal of Iran from the pursuit of an effort to return to pre-consensus on nuclear technology and enrichment. This option, of course, will have a direct and indirect cost to us, and it can again bring our international political situation to the pre-consensus situation, and, despite the superiority of the United States in international fora, Another issue would be to impose sanctions on the United Nations Security Council. While this option will not achieve a certain economic outcome in the current situation, and despite the active activation of negative expectations inside, it can aggravate the domestic economy. Therefore, this option will impose both economic and political costs on us, as in the concurrent one.
The third option is to deal actively with new post-BARJAM situations. In this option, from the point of view of international politics, the continuation of the seemingly incident in order to minimize the legitimacy of the United States and maximize the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran and simultaneously, the effective use of post-war economic conditions, in order to activate domestic capacities and implement the general policies of the economy Resistance is recommended. In an active deal with Europe, the Islamic Republic of Iran can continue to comply with its commitments to provide practical guarantees from Europe to comply with the obligations of the other party and refrain from signing any other double obligation, including the FATF and other European requests. . The main strategy in this option is to maximize the capacity of indigenous peoples, along with adjusting the current domestic economy, to increase economic resilience to rebuild the national economy against the enemy’s economic warfare. Under this option, the Islamic Republic of Iran must move from a passive state to Europe and, within the framework of its commitments, develop its nuclear technology capabilities, put strategic plans and strategies on the agenda into serious action, and wasting Most of the national opportunities, which are still waiting for the opening of the action, have been delayed.
It is important to note that today’s Islamic Republic of Iran is in an important historic screw, and if it passes through this stage, it will be immune to excessive retaliation for a long time. The manifestation of national will in this historical test (such as the holy war) can be surprising, which, of course, depends on empathy, support and trust, and the participation of all people and economic factors. From this point of view, the creation of any disappointment and disappointment, under any pretext, is not accepted. The factional demands should be abandoned and the only compassionate concern must be the passage of the revolutionary ship and the system, under the leadership of the economic vortex created by the enemies. At the same time, despite the creation of profitable tensions in some markets, there are promising signs of empathy and the emergence of people, and this is the only pillar of steadfastness that governments can and should rely on in implementing resilient economy policies. . The change of view of statesmen from abroad is the most important change that is expected to be based on past experience in the behavior of statesmen. In the end, attention is drawn to the statements of the Supreme Leader in the gathering of Basijis at the Azadi Stadium on October 12, 1997, which stated: “Those who promote are betraying the path to refuge in the enemy.”